Increased human activities (e.g., globally-operated business activities) may affect the environment on Earth. As a result, environmental issues/problems have appeared such as possible exhaustion of energy/resources and material recycling issues, for example.
With such social trends, business entities, which may operate business activities domestically or internationally, may need to recognize such environmental issues as important issues to sustain business activities, and may need to take measures to cope with such environmental issues.
With such background, a number of organizations or entities in the public sector (e.g., governmental organizations) or the private sector (e.g., industries) have developed or are developing methods for evaluating environmental impact caused by activities such as business activity (e.g., product manufacturing).
For example, business entities belonging to manufacturing industries may use an LCA (Life cycle Assessment) method to evaluate or assess the impact of business activity on the environment. Such manufacturing business entities may use an LCA method to evaluate or assess the environmental load caused by product manufacturing, for example.
The LCA method may quantitatively evaluate the environmental performance of a finished product in its life cycle using objective criteria, indicating environmental loads, which may occur during the life cycle of the finished product.
In general, a product life cycle may include a number of stages, which may start from a material mining stage to a product discarding stage. In other words, the product life cycle may include the stages of a product “from cradle to grave.”
With such background, it has been desired to devise a method which can more precisely evaluate or assess the environmental impact or load caused by business activities (e.g., product manufacturing).
From the viewpoint of a manufacturer producing a variety of products, a product life cycle may include multiple stages such as “front-end stage,” “manufacturing stage,” “distribution/sales stage,” “use stage,” “repair/maintenance stage,” “recovery/recycle stage,” and “discarding stage,” for example. The “front-end stage” may mean a stage for obtaining raw materials, parts or the like to be used for the “manufacturing stage.”
When a manufacturer conducts an LCA process for a product produced with the above-mentioned stages, the manufacturer may need to collect information regarding the environmental load which may occur at each of the above-mentioned stages.
To ideally conduct such an LCA process, it may be necessary to initially collect factual information on the environmental load of each material and part, which may be used at each of the above-mentioned stages. In other words, factual information on the environmental load of each material and part may need to be collected without missing required factual information.
In general, an LCA process can be conducted more precisely by collecting more precisely prepared factual information on environmental load.
In view of such background, several organizations in the public sector (e.g., governmental organizations) or the private sector (e.g., industries) have been developing and releasing databases listing the environmental load caused by material and parts as reference data. For example, such databases may generally be referred to as “LCI (Life cycle Inventory) data.”
Such LCI data may include data for environmental load, which may be caused by using materials and resources for human activities such as business activities.
In general, such LCI data for material or resources may be measured on a “per unit” basis. The “per unit” may mean a particular amount of a particular material or resource to be used for making a particular amount of a part or product. In other words, such LCI data for material or resource may mean the “input amount” of a material or resource for producing a particular amount of a part or product. In general, the particular amount of a part or product may mean a single unit of a part or product.
Hereinafter, the term “LCI data” having the above-mentioned meaning may be used for indicating an environmental load on a material, resource, part, product or the like.
Such LCI data may be classified on an item-by-item basis, wherein such item may include a vast variety of materials, resources or the like, such as metals (e.g., copper), biological resources (e.g., woods for making paper), energy recourses (e.g., petroleum), emission material (e.g., carbon dioxide, nitride oxide), or socially important resources (e.g., fresh water, electricity, gas), for example.
Each item identified as LCI data may have a numerical value to indicate the environmental load associated with each item, wherein such numerical value may indicate an environmental load that may occur when such item is used for manufacturing a part or product.
With such databases developed and released by several organizations, a business entity can obtain reference indicators (i.e., LCI data) for the environmental load for a number of materials and parts, which may be used by the business entity.
Such databases including LCI data may be useful for a business entity (e.g., a manufacturer) for evaluating the environmental load for materials, parts, or the like purchased from a third party company, because the business entity (e.g., a manufacturer) can obtain environmental load information for such purchased materials and parts by referring to the above-mentioned databases.
Such databases including LCI data for materials and parts may facilitate an environmental load evaluation by a business entity (e.g., a manufacturer) because the business entity can obtain such LCI data at an upstream stage of production, such as the procurement stage, for example.
If the business entity can obtain LCI data for materials, resources, and parts or the like, to be used for product manufacturing, at an upstream stage of production (e.g., the procurement stage), the manufacturer can then evaluate the environmental load of a to-be-produced product before such product is actually produced.
In such situation, the business entity (e.g., the manufacturer) can change or select materials, resources, and parts or the like to be used for a product by reviewing the result of an environmental load evaluation or assessment of the product.
Such process may be favorable from the viewpoint of producing an environmentally-concerned product because the business entity (e.g., the manufacturer) can foresee a possible environmental load of one product before actually producing the product, and then the business entity (e.g., the manufacturer) can select materials, resources, and parts or the like, which may have a smaller environmental load compared to the ones originally assigned for the product.
Furthermore, the business entity (e.g., the manufacturer) can conduct an LCA process at a design/plan stage of product manufacturing, which is another stage in the upstream stage of product manufacturing.
For example, a designer/engineer may select materials and parts to be used for producing a product, and then the designer/engineer can conduct an LCA process for a product to-be-produced based on such selected materials and parts.
Accordingly, if the above-mentioned databases including LCI data are publicly available, a business entity can obtain information on the environmental load caused by materials and parts at the upstream stage of business activities (e.g., product manufacturing), such as the design/plan stage or the procurement stage.
On one hand, a business entity can obtain information on the environmental load caused by materials and parts used in a finished product by analyzing each component configuring the finished product one-by-one. In such case, the materials and parts used for the finished product may be identified step-by-step by breaking down the components of the finished product, and then the environmental load of the materials and parts may be determined. However, such deconstruction process may be time-consuming and inefficient.
Accordingly, obtaining environmental load information such as LCI data at an upstream stage (e.g., at the design/plan stage) of business activities (e.g., product manufacturing) may be preferable from a viewpoint of conducting an LCA process more efficiently and effectively.
In view of such background, a system or method for conducting a LCA process on a given activity has been developed in recent years.
For example, in a related art a design-aide system may be used for product design in which the design-aide system may have a database for conducting an LCA process for product manufacturing. Such database may store LCI data and category information of materials and parts to be used for a product.
Such design-aide system may include a CAD (computer-aided design) system having a screen, by which a designer can designate or select materials and parts used for a product.
The design-aide system may then search designated materials and parts in the database to specify category information of the designated materials and parts.
Then, the design-aide system may further specify LCI data corresponding to the specified category information of the designated materials and parts to obtain the LCI data for the designated materials and parts.
As such, the design-aide system may obtain LCI data (or environmental load information) related to a product at an upstream stage (e.g., the design/plan stage), and then transmit such obtained LCI data to a LCA analyzing unit via a network such as a LAN (Local Area Network) and the Internet, for example.
For example, the LCA analyzing unit may receive such LCI data from a plurality of design-aide devices (e.g., CAD terminals) connected to the LCA analyzing unit, and conduct an LCA analysis using such information transmitted from the plurality of design-aide devices (e.g., CAD terminals).
Hereinafter, two types of environment impact evaluation methods based on the concept of LCA are briefly explained with reference to FIG. 1.
FIG. 1 shows examples of two types of environment impact evaluation methods: 1) issue comparing type method, and 2) damage assessment type method.
The “issue comparing type method” may have been used for a relatively long time, and the “damage assessment type method” may have been developed more recently, and these two types may have some differences as indicated below.
In the case of the issue comparing type method, an LCI (life cycle inventory) analysis may be conducted mainly for evaluating the impact of each material or resource on the natural environment.
For example, as partly shown in FIG. 1, the issue comparing type method may mainly evaluate a number of evaluation items one-by-one to assess the environmental impact of each item on the natural environment. For example, such items may include a material consumption amount (e.g., an amount of iron ore), and an amount of emission gas such as carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrogen oxide (NOx), and sulfur oxide (SOx), which may be generated when producing, using, and discarding a product in its one life cycle.
In such issue comparing type method, an amount of material to be used for a business activity (e.g., product manufacturing) or an amount of material to be released to the environment may be assessed item-by-item. For example, an amount of emission gas such as carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrogen oxide (NOx), and sulfur oxide (SOx), may be assessed one-by-one.
Based on such an analysis, assessing the environmental load in terms of the amount of material to-be-used or released, a business entity may recognize the environmental impact of its business activity and may make a new environmental management decision so that the business entity may conduct more environmentally sound operations.
Such issue comparing type method may be convenient for evaluating or assessing the environmental load of each item such as carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrogen oxide (NOx), and sulfur oxide (SOx).
However, the above-explained issue comparing type method may not be so effective to precisely evaluate or assess the overall environmental impact of a product in its life cycle, because the issue comparing type method may mainly evaluate or assess the environmental impact of each item one-by-one, and may not evaluate or assess the overall combined environmental impact of each item.
Furthermore, the above-explained issue comparing type method may mainly evaluate or assess the environmental load of each item with a numerical value expressed in terms of the “material amount to be used” or “used material amount.”
Accordingly, a user (e.g., a business entity) of such evaluation data may find it difficult to recognize the type or level of environmental impact that will occur by using a given amount of a material for a business activity (e.g. one product life cycle).
In view of such situations, the “damage assessment type method” may have been developed recently as shown for example in FIG. 1.
Although the damage assessment type method may also use LCI data (as in the issue comparing type method), the damage assessment type method may try to evaluate or assess the broader environmental impact caused by using a given amount of material for business activities (e.g., one product life cycle).
One example of such damage assessment type method is explained hereinafter.
For example, in Japan, a LIME (life cycle impact assessment method based on endpoint modeling) method has been developed to evaluate the environmental impact to be caused during one product life cycle.
The LIME method may evaluate the environmental impact during one product life cycle by computing the damage caused to the environment during the one product life cycle.
Specifically, the LIME method may conduct the following steps for evaluating environmental impact to be caused during one product life cycle: fate analysis, exposure analysis, damage assessment, effect analysis, and weighting process.
In the fate analysis, the concentration change of substances having a given environmental load in an environmental medium (e.g., atmosphere, water) is analyzed. Such concentration change may lead to a change in the exposure amount of substances to a biological receptor (e.g., human, animal, plant).
In the exposure analysis, a change of the exposure amount of substances to a biological receptor (e.g., human, animal, plant) is analyzed based on the fate analysis.
In the damage assessment, a change of possibly-occurring damage to the biological receptor (e.g., human, animal, plant) due to an increase of exposure amount of substances may be assessed, for example.
In the effect analysis, each of the possibly-occurring damage is accumulated for each endpoint (e.g., human health).
The endpoint may include various types of elements in the environment (e.g., the human environment and natural environment), which may be affected by using a given amount of material for one product life cycle.
For example, as shown in FIG. 1, an environmental impact of some metals such as copper may be explained as below. When a given amount of copper ore is mined at a mining site, a given amount of copper metal may be removed from the soil. Because the amount of copper contained in the earth's soil may be limited, if such mining operation is repeated, it may end up mining all of the copper from the earth's soil in a given time period. Such a case may be related to an endpoint termed the “social infrastructure” because a mining site may be considered to be an infrastructure required for maintaining human society.
Then, a possibly-occurring damage to the “social infrastructure” may be evaluated or assessed. For example, such evaluation or assessment of possibly-occurring damage to the “social infrastructure” may be considered in terms of infrastructure maintaining costs, infrastructure repairing costs, or the like.
In the weighting process, the priority levels of different kinds of endpoints related to one product life cycle may be considered to compute an overall environmental impact during one product life cycle, wherein such overall environmental impact may be expressed as a damage cost to the overall environmental.
In general, such damage cost may be measured in terms of money value so that a user (e.g., a business entity) can evaluate or assess the impact of one activity (e.g., product manufacturing) more clearly.
For example, the damage cost may include a repairing cost or a required countermeasure cost (e.g., the cost of medical care if human health is damaged), but the damage cost is not limited solely to such costs.
The above-mentioned evaluation or assessment methods employing LCA may be conducted with a framework as shown, for example, in FIG. 2.
As shown in FIG. 2, the LCA framework may include step S1 for setting an object and scope, step S2 for inventory analysis (e.g., LCI data analysis), step S3 for impact evaluation, step S4 for result interpretation, step S5 for reporting, and step S6 for critical review, for example. Furthermore, the reporting at step S5 may be used for applications at step S7, such as product development as shown in FIG. 2.
However, although the above-explained issue comparing type method and damage assessment type method may have a common objective to evaluate or assess the environmental impact of activities (e.g., business activities), the issue comparing type method and the damage assessment type method may have a different view of LCI data.
For example, the issue comparing type method and the damage assessment type method may have a different view of inventories (e.g., LCI data) to be used for the environmental evaluation. For example, in regard to metal resources, the damage assessment type method such as LIME may assess the weight of the true metal elements, and not the amount of mineral ore of the concerned metal. However, the issue comparing type method may assess the weight of ore content.
Such differences may lead to a discrepancy of environmental impact evaluation results obtained by each of the two methods, and such situation may be inconvenient for a user (e.g., a business entity) that needs environmental impact evaluation information matched to an actual business operation conducted by the user.
FIG. 3 schematically shows an example of such inconvenience due to different views of LCI data between the issue comparing type method and damage assessment type method.
Hereinafter, a different view of LCI data, which may be observed between the issue comparing type method and the damage assessment type method, may be explained using as an example the “resource exhaustion” of copper metal.
In general, a data provider (e.g., a mining company, a manufacturing company) may prepare conventional type LCI data for each item, such as the amount of copper ore to be used for a given part or product.
In general, a tracing back of the life cycle of each item (e.g., copper, copper ore) may require a tremendous amount of time and complex steps, which may not be tolerable for the data provider. In view of such situation, the data provider may prepare conventional type LCI data for materials (e.g., raw material such mineral ore) to be input into a given manufacturing stage, which may be controllable by the data provider (e.g., mining company, manufacturing company).
On one hand, in the damage assessment type method, an assessment method developer may need data of virgin materials (e.g., true copper metal) to be input into a given manufacturing stage for conducting an environmental impact evaluation for the “resource exhaustion” of metals such as copper.
Because of such situations, a user (e.g., business entity) may need to adjust the conventional type LCI data to a modified LCI data, matched to the damage assessment type, so that the user (e.g., business entity) can use such modified LCI data for evaluating the environmental impact of a given business activity.
Accordingly, a user (e.g., business entity) may need an efficient and effective system for conducting such modification or correction of the LCI data so that a user (e.g., business entity) can employ the above-mentioned issue comparing type method and damage assessment type method in a seamless manner.